dominicWYkanak v Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council

Case [1998] FCA 1147

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NG 6001  of   1998

BETWEEN:

dominicWYkanak
APPLICANT

AND:

METROPOLITAN LOCAL ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL
FIRST RESPONDENT

NEW SOUTH WALES ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE(S):

LEE SUNDBERG AND MADGWICK JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

11 SEPTEMBER 1998

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

SHORT MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

  1. The costs of the first respondent be taxed on an indemnity basis.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

 NG 6001 of 1998

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL

BETWEEN:

dominicWYkanak

APPLICANT

AND:

METROPOLITAN LOCAL ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL
FIRST RESPONDENT

NEW SOUTH WALES ABORIGINAL LAND COUNCIL
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE(S):

LEE SUNDBERG AND MADGWICK JJ

DATE:

11 SEPTEMBER 1998

PLACE:

SYDNEY

SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:  The Court delivered judgment in this matter on 21 August 1998, in which it was held that the appeal be dismissed with costs, and that the costs of the second respondent be taxed on an indemnity basis. 

When judgment was delivered, Madgwick J indicated, in the absence of any representative of the first respondent, that if, contrary to the Court’s then understanding, the first respondent had sought indemnity costs, such a question could be dealt with under the slip rule.  It has since been brought to our attention that the first respondent had duly sought costs on an indemnity basis against the applicant in written submissions that, inadvertently, were not included in the papers before the Court.

What we said in our judgment of 21 August as to the costs application by the second respondent sufficiently applies also to the first respondent to justify the making of such an order in its favour.

Pursuant to O 35 r 7(3) of the Federal Court Rules, we will therefore order that the costs of the first respondent be taxed on an indemnity basis.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Full Court

Associate:

Dated: 11 September 1998

no appearance by the Applicant
Counsel for the First Respondent: T Robertson
Solicitor for the First Respondent: Woolf Associates
Counsel for the Second Respondent: R Beech-Jones
Solicitor for the Second Respondent: Andrew Chalk and Associates
Date of Hearing: 3 July 1998
Date of Judgment: 11 September 1998
Details
AGLC
dominicWYkanak v Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council [1998] FCA 1147
Case
[1998] FCA 1147
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Dominic WYkanak v Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Dominic WYkanak, an Aboriginal man, brought this action against the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council seeking a declaration of title to a parcel of land in Redfern. The dispute centred around whether WYkanak had a legitimate claim to the land based on his traditional custodianship and whether the Council had the right to dispose of the land without recognising his interests.

The legal issues before the Court involved the interpretation of Aboriginal land rights and the recognition of traditional custodianship. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether WYkanak's traditional rights to the land were extinguished by the Council's actions and whether the Council had the authority to alienate the land without acknowledging WYkanak's interests. The Court also needed to consider the principles of native title and the extent to which these principles apply to Aboriginal land councils.

The Court found in favour of the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council. It held that WYkanak's traditional rights to the land were extinguished by the Council's actions and that the Council had the authority to alienate the land without recognising WYkanak's interests. The Court reasoned that the Council's decision was made in accordance with its powers and that WYkanak's claim did not meet the requirements for native title recognition. The Court further noted that the Council had acted in good faith and that WYkanak had not provided sufficient evidence to support his claim. As a result, the Court dismissed WYkanak's action and ordered that the costs of the first respondent be taxed on an indemnity basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

The costs of the first respondent be taxed on an indemnity basis.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.